Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1887-09-21
WEDNESDAY ..SEPT'R q, 1887.
.Iudce-Mac,e Law.

to tatters tho teachings of the Confcde-
rates, and uses language in speaking Of
it which indicates deadly hostility to
the southern people.
Tie Charleston Nc'cs ami Courier
repeats in substance remark which We
made some time ago when it says that il
the delegates at Philadelphia on Septem-
Der II, 1887, had had the foreknowledge
that on that day a hundred years later
a Judge Of the Supreme Court would
speak Of the Union of States as Justice
MILLER spoke, there would have been
IN adjournment incontinently, and no
Union Of the present kind to celebrate
with pomp and pride. Nobody who is
acquainted with the history OF the men
who framed the Federal Constitution
can for moment doubt the truth of
that averment. The Virginia delegates
to the convention that framed the Con-
stitution would, led by General WASH
1sGToy, have washed their hands Of the
Constitution for even after it had
been fully explained in tho Virginia
convention held to ratify it this latter
convention refused to consent to Its
ratification except upon the terms set
forth il the following preamble to the
resolution of ratiiication-namely:
eve, the delegates of the people Of
Virginia, DO in the name
and in behalf of the people Of Virginia
declare and make known that the
powC1s granted under the Constitution,
being derived from the people OF the
United States, may be resumed by them
whatsoever the same shall beperyerted
to their injury or oppression, and that
every power not granted thereby re-
mains with them and at their Will, -
&c, &c, &c.
The people "9ranted" The powers
and the people had the right to ere
sumo" the same. That was the under
standing of the fathers ; and that was
the understandingof the seceSsionists Of
1861.
We are Of course fully aware that
Mr.. Justice MtLLER's construction of
the Constitution Was by war made tho
authoritative construction. But We
deny that the southern people held that
theory when the southern States tried
to secede from the Union. SO far were
they from holding that theory that they
had no more doubt of the justice OF
their cause than they had Of their own
existence They never for a moment
considered that they were violating the
oath TO support the Federal Constitu-
ton when at the biddingof their States
they took up arms to defend what they
honestly believed to be the right Of the
States to secede.
We reproduce from Mr.. Justice MIL-
LER's speech the following impressive
warning, and ask him TO take it to
heart himself. He said:
"History teaches us in no mistaken
language how often customs and prac-
tees which were originated without
lawful warrant and opposed 20 the
sound construction of the law have
come to overload and pervsrt it, as
commentators on the text Of Holy
Scripture have established doctrines
wholly at variance with its true spirit.
That language describes exactly the
course of the Supreme Court OF the
United States. 1t has originated with
out constitutional warrant customs and
practices opposed to the sonnd con-
struction Of the Constitution and has
overloaded and perverted the Constitu-
ton as commentators on the Bible have
established doctrines wholly at variance
with its true spirit.
We will cito one instance OF such
peryersion. That phrase in the Fede-
raj Constitution which provides that no
State shall pass any law impairing the
obligation Of contracts was not in
tended by the trainers of the Constitu'
ton to apply to the debts of the States
themselves. 1t had no other object than
TO prohibit the States from passing laws
impairipg the obligation OF contracts
between persons. But the Supreme
Court of the United States has decided
that that phrase includes the States
own debts. And all acquiesce ia that
construction, though we all know that
il is "judee-made law" Certainly it
was not made by the trainers OF the
Constitution.
Practically, ii makes no difference
what the fathers supposed the Consti-
tuition to mean. We are all bound TO
take il as tits expounded by the tribu-
nal authorized TO construe it for the
whole nation. We have referred 10 the
facts OF the case only because we desire
TO vindicste the truth OF history, and to
show that there is no faint of treason
in the reputation Of the statesmen who
led the southern people into the wal
between the States. II Mr.. Justice
MILLrR's afIlrmaiions were true, those
statesmen would deserve execration in
stead OF admiration.
Bot We would not do injustice TO
Justice MnLER. he is not prepared
10 wipe out the States; for he says;
."While the pendulum OF public
opinion has swung with much force
away from the extreme point OF State
rights doctrine, there may be danger
Of its reaching an extreme point on
the other side. In my opinion the just
and sqnsl observance Of the rights of
States end 81 the General Government,
= defined by the present Consultation,
q r pecfae1ry % fhs permanent pros